Be consistent, DL, whether obiad is lunch or dinner. In other Slavic languages (ru:обед, ua:обід), it is the second meal of the day. Lunch.
For you, my American colleague, but not necessarily for everyone.
In English English, "dinner" is the main meal of the day. If you dine at noon, you have tea or supper later; or you may have a light lunch and dine in the evening.
The ambiguity is in the dialects of English.
Question: in Poland, I understand that it is more usual to eat the main meal in the middle of the day. If however, you have a sandwich then, and a three course meal in the evening, does the evening meal become obiad?
It depends. traditionally it is kolacja, but some people would call it obiad. Also around 5 pm I would still consider it late obiad (unless it's Christmas Eve), but around 7 pm I would consider it "kolacja" or "obiadokolacja".
No, the sandwich would be obiad and the three-course evening meal would be kolacja.
The meaning of what a "main" meal is subjective. Lunch can have more calories than dinner, or have more side dishes, or a family can sit down for lunch instead of dinner, but it's still called lunch, if you eat dinner (kolację) later in the day.
Whether a meal is first, second, third, is not subjective but objective, and in almost every Slavic language, there are three "main" meals of the day, of which the second one is PL:obiad, CZ:oběd, SK:obed, UA:обід, BY:абед, RU:обед, BG:обяд.
Really? All three meals of the day are of equal size? That is certainly different, and worth knowing. I've lived in several countries, but never yet
Of course, what constitutes the main meal is subjective. That is why which meal consitutes "dinner" differs between different English-speaking cultures (by climate, by social class and also by age). My infant and junior schools rang the dinner-bell at noon because they assumed that the evening meal would be a light tea. My office had a lunch break because it assumed I would be dining later with my family. They didn't check with every attendee - so some pupils had a packed lunch at dinnertime and some colleagues had their dinner during their lunch hour and a light supper in their bedsit in the evening.
But your original statement and your latest contradict each other.
If obiad is always the second meal of the day, then it must be translated as either dinner or lunch depending on the English context. My Polish neighbours tell me that it is traditional in Poland to eat the main meal around midday - none of them eat three main meals, but maybe they have adapted to current location - so I would consider "dinner" to be preferable translation, but I agree that both should be accepted, to accommodate those English-speakers who are accustomed to eating "lunch" at that time of day and may be unaware of variations in usage.
Not realy. From time to time I eat all day long :) And as Ukrainian( partly) I eat even at night ( post USSR cityzens should remember the joke in CVN(КВН) programm about that )
I don't understand something here: after jest, shouldn't we use instrumental? So shouldn't it be "ten obiad jest dobrym"?
not when there is only adjective.
only adjective is in nominative . And you cannot use "to" with only adjective.
So you can't just say "This is good", you need to specify what "this" is? Or is there another way of saying it?
The sentence is ok, but "dobro" is a noun. "To jest dobre" is a sentence with adjective.
No way I'm going to try correcting you, my Polish isn't good enough! :) But I don't see how that can be compatible with immery's statement.
you can. I phrased it wrong. I meant that in
noun is adjective - you use "jest", and adjectivei is in nominative, you cannot use "to" as equivalent of jest. (adjective in a gender of noun)
this is adjective- you can have this kind of sentence "to jest dobre", but 1) you need "jest", and 2) adjective is always neuter.
all adjectives in nominative are singular neuter=plural not masculine personal.
Now that i thik about "to dobre" also exists- but it's a phrase that expresses irony of situation.
Dziękuję bardzo! I think I've got this now. You can say "to + jest + neuter adjective in nominative" but not "to + adjective". Basically, "to" does not contain a verb and a sentence requires a verb to actually be a sentence. It's like in English, you can't say "This good", you need to say "This is good". Have I got this right?
not exactly. to can act be a verb equivalent in some sentences, but not the ones where adjective is "alone"
Iliada to (jest) książka/Iliada jest książką Iliad is a book
Iliada to (jest) dobra książka/Iliada jest dobrą książką Iliad is a good book
To (jest) dobra książka. This is a good book
(ta)Książka jest dobra. (This) book is good
To jest dobre. This is good.
You can read about "this is" here https://www.duolingo.com/comment/16373167 but I think this particular isssue was not raised.
So, to simplify, using this exercise, one may not say, "To dobry," to mean "This is good," or "It's good," but it would be OK to say,
To dobry obiad., meaning "this is a good lunch," Correct?
@va-diim, yes , but you can also say "to jest dobre" - this is a perfect way to express the fact that you have no idea what you are eating but it tastes good.
Is the end of obiad pronounced like iat instead of iad or is it me that can't hear it properly?
I hear domething between "t" and "d". And in real Polish - it could be both depending on region, as in some places (cough Warszawa ) they device final d so it sounds like "T", while in other places final "d" stays voiced.
I agree, but there is a lot of arguing about this topic because, apparently, different dialects of English use lunch/dinner interchangeably, especially when introducing "supper" into the mix.